Architects, CCBC refine options for community center

(Editor’s note: This article was updated on September 17.)

Architects and the Community Center Building Committee this week continued to refine the community center options that residents will see at the State of the Town meeting on September 30, ending Wednesday with three main options plus alternates to two of them.

On September 13, ICON Architects offered refinements of the three options they presented on August 16 that will meet the cost limits voted by the town (up to 100%, 75% and 50% of the $25 million estimate from 2022, or $25 million/$18.75 million/$12.5 million). These latest options replace earlier ones with the same names and are based on discussion at the September 13 meeting and a public forum on September 12, plus more detailed figures from their cost estimators. Each new total includes both construction and a 20% add-on for “soft costs” (design, owner’s project manager, furniture and equipment, etc.) Costs are in 2025 dollars.

Option 1 ($20.01 million + soft costs = $24.01 million)

• Demolish all three pods
• Build a single new building of 19,474 square feet that would include 5,000 square feet exclusively for LEAP, the same as it has now

Option 2 ($15.99 million + soft costs = $19.19 million)

• Demolish pods A and B
• Renovate pod C
• Build either a one-story or two-story community center that’s not attached to pod C. A two-story building would have a more compact footprint and probably some roof overhangs to accommodate enough solar panels. The sizes would be similar (12,672 square feet for two stories or 12,285 for one story) and the price tags would be about the same.

Option 3 ($11.44 million + soft costs = $13.73 million)

• Demolish pod A
• Renovate pod B and add 5,485 square feet of new construction to result in a 10,500-square-foot building that’s roughly half new and half renovated
• Leave pods A and C as they are
  • Alternate #1: Add another 900 square feet to the new building to meet the minimum size recommended by the architects (added cost: $714,000 for a total of $13.2 million).
  • Alternate #2: Include renovation of pod C (added cost: $3.42 million for a total of $15.92 million). If both alternates were accepted, the total cost would be $16.64 million.

In summary, the approximate size of the community center exclusive of LEAP would be:

• 14,470 square feet for Option 1
• 12,285 or 12,672 square feet for Option 2
• 10,500 square feet for Option 3

ICON recommends a community center of at least 13,000 square feet, or 11,400 square feet “at the bare bones end of the spectrum,” said Ned Collier, principal architect. “Just by the numbers, [Option 3] this scheme falls short of our minimal target and does not renovate pod C… and we’ve heard that not renovating LEAP is a show-stopper.”

Renovating all three detached pods without adding more space is also not viable, CCBC member Tim Christenfeld said. “We’ve done really well pushing [the pods] as far as we can for 64 years… The idea that we would bring a proposal to the town for $12 million to move the COA&HS from one suboptimal facility to a different suboptimal facility is just nuts. It’s just pissing the money away if we’re not solving the problems we’re trying to solve.”

There has been some concern in past months about the cost of a much-needed renovation of the LEAP pod and whether it ought to even be considered in the community center construction planning, especially if it’s not physically attached. As one CCBC member said at the September 12 forum, “LEAP is not really our core thing,” but most of those involved assumed that LEAP would be at least renovated regardless of which option is chosen. However, making the LEAP renovation into a separate project would incur additional unnecessary spending for project management, design, and rapidly rising construction costs.

CCBC member Dan Pereira observed that Option 3 plus its alternates “is really another 75% option” in terms of cost. Collier acknowledged that but observed that Option 3 is substantially different from Option 2 in a design sense.

Sara Mattes, a frequent critic of the community center planning process, argued that “the only way it [the measure to design the community center] passed was because it committed to these lower price points. The vote also committed to [the idea that] alternate sites would be fully explored for some activities, and the second piece of the vote has not been fully explored — it’s been summarily dismissed rather than openly discussed.” Studies have shown that Bemis Hall and the Pierce House are not adequate in many ways, and there are ongoing problems with having senior lunches at the First Parish Church. Mattes acknowledged that money would have to be spent to bring Bemis and Pierce up to snuff if a community center isn’t built.

“I feel as if the committee and architects want something more than the 50% option, but I’m worried that the town isn’t going to be very interested in that,” said resident Lynne Smith.

At the State of the Town meeting, each repeating session on the community center will consist of a short presentation, a breakout session, and then a paper survey in which residents can rank their choices (including a “none of the above” option). There will be large drawings of all the options on easels as well as handouts, which will also be available before September 30. 

The Finance Committee will discuss borrowing costs and tax implications as part of its SOTT preparations at its September 18 meeting. “The current estimate is that the median tax bill will increase by approximately $300 per year for every $10 million borrowed,” Town Administrator Tim Higgins said on Thursday.